I reject out of hand that someone who opposed Trump is just as responsible for his election as someone who voted for Trump.

alright. round and round we go.

Can you give some examples of people opposed to Trump who blatantly lied / mislead people as often and thoroughly as the Trump administration did? Certainly, there are some idiots on both sides . . . but from where I'm sitting, the adoption of 'fake news' rejection of fact, rejection of science, has appeared to be more widespread in right wing circles.

About the most damaging group of fact rejectors in the left wing I can think of have been the anti-vaccine and 'alternative medicine' crew. They've never come close to a majority on the left though.

Tolerance of refuting rational argument and denouncing all argument leads to frustrations, misunderstandings, and contempt; this in turn breeds division and mistrust, until, the delusions are manifested as actions and we arrive at full on intolerance that threatens the security of the society. Once we get to this stage, tolerance is always supplanted by intolerance and only reinstated after much bloodshed.

Trump was not elected on November 8th, 2016; he was elected the day when we first gave up facts and truth for tolerance, inclusiveness, and "social justice". Crime and Punishment has come full cycle. Fight for what's true, not for what is "politically correct", no matter the cost.

I'm unsure of how you are relating political correctness with a tolerance of refuting rational argument. Could you give some examples?

There probably is some overlap but the refuting of rational argument has and always will exist. I'm also unsure of what the alternative to allowing people to be irrational is. State controlled media and internet access? Punishment for poor logic?

No. This is a thread about The Trump Show, I don't want to derail it, so perhaps in another thread. That being said, the mods have publicly stated many times they follow the post modern interpretation of the Popper quote, with an emphasis on "civility" (subject to mods' personal preferences). I don't suffer fools well, especially when the data/studies support my unpopular conclusions. We both remember what happened the last time. ya?

This is their house and the mods make the rules, nothing wrong with that. Rules (and laws) are meant to keep/promote order, a well known secret (I recall you being a lawyer) but somehow not apparent to the general public.

I agree we see irrationality a lot with the right wing crowd these days, but it's mostly because their flag bearer is drawing much attention. Does anyone still remember what happened to Lindsay Shepherd? BS like that happens just as much on the left, or at least enough that Shepherd knew she had better record the meeting. Anyone remember/know about this guy? The list goes on and on.

We've simply looked another way because they are our natural allies against Trump, even though they spawned from the same seed. Keep it up, and we will never be rid of the likes of Trump.

Too much rhetoric? I am as much of a stable genius as the 45th, but at least I recognize I am close to 100% douche.

Now, let's return our focus on speculating about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...

Edit: Attempt to get it back on track. Trump not thrilled about the rate hikes!

No. This is a thread about The Trump Show, I don't want to derail it, so perhaps in another thread. That being said, the mods have publicly stated many times they follow the post modern interpretation of the Popper quote, with an emphasis on "civility" (subject to mods' personal preferences). I don't suffer fools well, especially when the data/studies support my unpopular conclusions. We both remember what happened the last time. ya?

This is their house and the mods make the rules, nothing wrong with that. Rules (and laws) are meant to keep/promote order, a well known secret (I recall you being a lawyer) but somehow not apparent to the general public.

I agree we see irrationality a lot with the right wing crowd these days, but it's mostly because their flag bearer is drawing much attention. Does anyone still remember what happened to Lindsay Shepherd? BS like that happens just as much on the left, or at least enough that Shepherd knew she had better record the meeting. Anyone remember/know about this guy? The list goes on and on.

We've simply looked another way because they are our natural allies against Trump, even though they spawned from the same seed. Keep it up, and we will never be rid of the likes of Trump.

Too much rhetoric? I am as much of a stable genius as the 45th, but at least I recognize I am close to 100% douche.

Now, let's return our focus on speculating about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...

Edit: Attempt to get it back on track. Trump not thrilled about the rate hikes!

So BOTH SIDES DO IT because even though the leader of the Republican party came to prominence promoting birtherism (apparently, I won't believe what his investigators found in HI), once a freshman SJW at Barnard was mean to a conservative professor and then some mean lady was rude to Jordan Peterson?

We don't just see irrationality with the right wing crowd because Trump draws all the attention. We see millions of Americans voting for an ignoramus to run our country and signing on to the nonsense. Trump voters. Republicans. They carry the blame. They voted for a man who... well, we've discussed it at length. Liberals voted for an accomplished grandma with a resume a mile long who terrifies Putin, not a liberal arts college gender studies major shouting about veganism and pronouns. So, both sides don't do it. There is no equivalency. I won't take the blame.

And I didn't make these people vote for Trump because someone said they were racists or deplorables. Honestly, at this point, that asessment is looking spot on. They are willing to sell out our country to Russia.

I agree we see irrationality a lot with the right wing crowd these days, but it's mostly because their flag bearer is drawing much attention.

Rationality is subjective. From my position actively supporting a racist, misogynistic, sexist, bigoted bully who has bragged of sexual assaulting women (which is an actual crime) and committed human rights abuses against people from "shithole countries" and who is actively working against the interest of the US, seems pretty fucking irrational. I mean this a guy who thinks our bodies run on batteries. He has a lot of respect for murderous dictators (Putin and "Rocket man"). I could go on. But let's not pretend this is "mostly" Trump. It's pretty damn easy to stand up and say "I can't support this asshole and what he stands for because it's not who I am."

With his approvals ratings still as high as they are (granted they are pretty damn low still) that's a lot of people supporting all this nonsense.

I agree we see irrationality a lot with the right wing crowd these days, but it's mostly because their flag bearer is drawing much attention.

Rationality is subjective. From my position actively supporting a racist, misogynistic, sexist, bigoted bully who has bragged of sexual assaulting women (which is an actual crime) and committed human rights abuses against people from "shithole countries" and who is actively working against the interest of the US, seems pretty fucking irrational. I mean this a guy who thinks our bodies run on batteries. He has a lot of respect for murderous dictators (Putin and "Rocket man"). I could go on. But let's not pretend this is "mostly" Trump. It's pretty damn easy to stand up and say "I can't support this asshole and what he stands for because it's not who I am."

With his approvals ratings still as high as they are (granted they are pretty damn low still) that's a lot of people supporting all this nonsense.

Your post would be an example of "fake news". Trump did not "brag about assaulting women" in the Access Hollywood tape. He said "they let you do it". This is consensual "pu$$y grabbing". Presumably an open minded sexually liberated individual like yourself would not condemn consensual genital grabbing, even if the women only let rich and famous guys do it.

The biggest lie of the 21st Century would be "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan". This lie was told by Obama to promote the passage of legislation. It was a lie to the American people promoted by a corrupt media.

If you think calling people racist and bigoted because they want to enforce immigration laws is productive, go right ahead. Not interested in this ad hominem crap. If you want to discuss issues rather than thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or corrupt, that would be welcome. Otherwise, go ahead and be a "libtard".

Your post would be an example of "fake news". Trump did not "brag about assaulting women" in the Access Hollywood tape. He said "they let you do it". This is consensual "pu$$y grabbing". Presumably an open minded sexually liberated individual like yourself would not condemn consensual genital grabbing, even if the women only let rich and famous guys do it.

The biggest lie of the 21st Century would be "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan". This lie was told by Obama to promote the passage of legislation. It was a lie to the American people promoted by a corrupt media.

If you think calling people racist and bigoted because they want to enforce immigration laws is productive, go right ahead. Not interested in this ad hominem crap. If you want to discuss issues rather than thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or corrupt, that would be welcome. Otherwise, go ahead and be a "libtard".

I agree we see irrationality a lot with the right wing crowd these days, but it's mostly because their flag bearer is drawing much attention.

Rationality is subjective. From my position actively supporting a racist, misogynistic, sexist, bigoted bully who has bragged of sexual assaulting women (which is an actual crime) and committed human rights abuses against people from "shithole countries" and who is actively working against the interest of the US, seems pretty fucking irrational. I mean this a guy who thinks our bodies run on batteries. He has a lot of respect for murderous dictators (Putin and "Rocket man"). I could go on. But let's not pretend this is "mostly" Trump. It's pretty damn easy to stand up and say "I can't support this asshole and what he stands for because it's not who I am."

With his approvals ratings still as high as they are (granted they are pretty damn low still) that's a lot of people supporting all this nonsense.

Your post would be an example of "fake news". Trump did not "brag about assaulting women" in the Access Hollywood tape. He said "they let you do it". This is consensual "pu$$y grabbing". Presumably an open minded sexually liberated individual like yourself would not condemn consensual genital grabbing, even if the women only let rich and famous guys do it.

The biggest lie of the 21st Century would be "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan". This lie was told by Obama to promote the passage of legislation. It was a lie to the American people promoted by a corrupt media.

If you think calling people racist and bigoted because they want to enforce immigration laws is productive, go right ahead. Not interested in this ad hominem crap. If you want to discuss issues rather than thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or corrupt, that would be welcome. Otherwise, go ahead and be a "libtard".

Your post would be an example of "fake news". Trump did not "brag about assaulting women" in the Access Hollywood tape. He said "they let you do it". This is consensual "pu$$y grabbing". Presumably an open minded sexually liberated individual like yourself would not condemn consensual genital grabbing, even if the women only let rich and famous guys do it.

The biggest lie of the 21st Century would be "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan". This lie was told by Obama to promote the passage of legislation. It was a lie to the American people promoted by a corrupt media.

If you think calling people racist and bigoted because they want to enforce immigration laws is productive, go right ahead. Not interested in this ad hominem crap. If you want to discuss issues rather than thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or corrupt, that would be welcome. Otherwise, go ahead and be a "libtard".

I think I got a bingo on my fox news buzzword bingo card.

Maybe I got a bingo on my MSDNC, Clinton News Network watching bingo card. Try to address the substantive points I made. I guess you can't.

Your post would be an example of "fake news". Trump did not "brag about assaulting women" in the Access Hollywood tape. He said "they let you do it". This is consensual "pu$$y grabbing". Presumably an open minded sexually liberated individual like yourself would not condemn consensual genital grabbing, even if the women only let rich and famous guys do it.

The biggest lie of the 21st Century would be "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan". This lie was told by Obama to promote the passage of legislation. It was a lie to the American people promoted by a corrupt media.

If you think calling people racist and bigoted because they want to enforce immigration laws is productive, go right ahead. Not interested in this ad hominem crap. If you want to discuss issues rather than thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or corrupt, that would be welcome. Otherwise, go ahead and be a "libtard".

I agree we see irrationality a lot with the right wing crowd these days, but it's mostly because their flag bearer is drawing much attention.

Rationality is subjective. From my position actively supporting a racist, misogynistic, sexist, bigoted bully who has bragged of sexual assaulting women (which is an actual crime) and committed human rights abuses against people from "shithole countries" and who is actively working against the interest of the US, seems pretty fucking irrational. I mean this a guy who thinks our bodies run on batteries. He has a lot of respect for murderous dictators (Putin and "Rocket man"). I could go on. But let's not pretend this is "mostly" Trump. It's pretty damn easy to stand up and say "I can't support this asshole and what he stands for because it's not who I am."

With his approvals ratings still as high as they are (granted they are pretty damn low still) that's a lot of people supporting all this nonsense.

Your post would be an example of "fake news". Trump did not "brag about assaulting women" in the Access Hollywood tape. He said "they let you do it". This is consensual "pu$$y grabbing". Presumably an open minded sexually liberated individual like yourself would not condemn consensual genital grabbing, even if the women only let rich and famous guys do it.

The biggest lie of the 21st Century would be "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan". This lie was told by Obama to promote the passage of legislation. It was a lie to the American people promoted by a corrupt media.

If you think calling people racist and bigoted because they want to enforce immigration laws is productive, go right ahead. Not interested in this ad hominem crap. If you want to discuss issues rather than thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or corrupt, that would be welcome. Otherwise, go ahead and be a "libtard".

Uh, no. He admitted he never asked, so thatís not fucking consensual, thank you very much. He did not give one single shit whether they wanted him to. At the most, ďwhen youíre a celebrity, they let you do itĒ indicates that they were too intimidated to stop him.

It is pretty troubling ó and telling ó that you donít see the difference. Jesus.

Thankfully. Not sure how this excuses blatant lies told to promote legislation.

When discussing Trump's comments about pussy grabbing, what does Obama have to do with it? Was Obama present at the time? Was he secretly recording the conversation when Trump stated that he was a pussy grabber?

In other words, two people can be liars and assholes at the same time. Bringing up one lie does not excuse the comments or actions of another person.

"Well, Trump said he was a pussy grabber but...Obama lied about health care!"

Do you see how ridiculous that is when people are discussing Trump? It's a form of equivalency and whataboutism that has no meaning.

Uh, no. He admitted he never asked, so thatís not fucking consensual, thank you very much. He did not give one single shit whether they wanted him to. At the most, ďwhen youíre a celebrity, they let you do itĒ indicates that they were too intimidated to stop him.

It is pretty troubling ó and telling ó that you donít see the difference. Jesus.[/quote]

All this hand-wringing over what Trump said but nothing over what Bill Clinton did. Don't you think the White House intern was intimidated by the Commander in Chief?

Thankfully. Not sure how this excuses blatant lies told to promote legislation.

When discussing Trump's comments about pussy grabbing, what does Obama have to do with it? Was Obama present at the time? Was he secretly recording the conversation when Trump stated that he was a pussy grabber?

In other words, two people can be liars and assholes at the same time. Bringing up one lie does not excuse the comments or actions of another person.

"Well, Trump said he was a pussy grabber but...Obama lied about health care!"

Do you see how ridiculous that is when people are discussing Trump? It's a form of equivalency and whataboutism that has no meaning.

I think behavior is judged by standards that have been set. There needs to be some consistency.

I don't like what Trump said. It was, however, a private conversation and he wasn't the President or even in public office. Unlike Obama and Clinton's lies.

Thankfully. Not sure how this excuses blatant lies told to promote legislation.

When discussing Trump's comments about pussy grabbing, what does Obama have to do with it? Was Obama present at the time? Was he secretly recording the conversation when Trump stated that he was a pussy grabber?

In other words, two people can be liars and assholes at the same time. Bringing up one lie does not excuse the comments or actions of another person.

"Well, Trump said he was a pussy grabber but...Obama lied about health care!"

Do you see how ridiculous that is when people are discussing Trump? It's a form of equivalency and whataboutism that has no meaning.

I think behavior is judged by standards that have been set. There needs to be some consistency.

I don't like what Trump said. It was, however, a private conversation and he wasn't the President or even in public office. Unlike Obama and Clinton's lies.

Interesting, so you must then think that Trump should be impeached for lying while in office.

All this hand-wringing over what Trump said but nothing over what Bill Clinton did. Don't you think the White House intern was intimidated by the Commander in Chief?

Newsflash: Bill Clinton is no longer the President.

Get over it.

Newsflash - the election is over and and your gal "Cankles" Clinton lost. Get over it.

Itís not really surprising that a guy who doesnít understand the concept of female consent would toss out a pathetic and sexist insult of Clinton. Because, you know, Trump is super attractive. Iím sure his ankles are hawt, yíall.

Thankfully. Not sure how this excuses blatant lies told to promote legislation.

When discussing Trump's comments about pussy grabbing, what does Obama have to do with it? Was Obama present at the time? Was he secretly recording the conversation when Trump stated that he was a pussy grabber?

In other words, two people can be liars and assholes at the same time. Bringing up one lie does not excuse the comments or actions of another person.

"Well, Trump said he was a pussy grabber but...Obama lied about health care!"

Do you see how ridiculous that is when people are discussing Trump? It's a form of equivalency and whataboutism that has no meaning.

I think behavior is judged by standards that have been set. There needs to be some consistency.

I don't like what Trump said. It was, however, a private conversation and he wasn't the President or even in public office. Unlike Obama and Clinton's lies.

Interesting, so you must then think that Trump should be impeached for lying while in office.

Clinton lied under oath during a deposition. He was even disbarred by the State of Arkansas for lying (he lost his law license). He did not contest this. Need to look this up.

All this hand-wringing over what Trump said but nothing over what Bill Clinton did. Don't you think the White House intern was intimidated by the Commander in Chief?

Newsflash: Bill Clinton is no longer the President.

Get over it.

Newsflash - the election is over and and your gal "Cankles" Clinton lost. Get over it.

Itís not really surprising that a guy who doesnít really understand the concept of female consent would toss out a pathetic and sexist insult of Clinton. Because, you know, Trump is super attractive. Iím sure his ankles are hawt, yíall.

All this hand-wringing over what Trump said but nothing over what Bill Clinton did. Don't you think the White House intern was intimidated by the Commander in Chief?

Newsflash: Bill Clinton is no longer the President.

Get over it.

Newsflash - the election is over and and your gal "Cankles" Clinton lost. Get over it.

Itís not really surprising that a guy who doesnít really understand the concept of female consent would toss out a pathetic and sexist insult of Clinton. Because, you know, Trump is super attractive. Iím sure his ankles are hawt, yíall.

Fucking Christ.

Melania is pretty hot. The Donald isn't my thing.

The other thing I notice is that a lot of super sexist dudes are extremely unattractive themselves.

All this hand-wringing over what Trump said but nothing over what Bill Clinton did. Don't you think the White House intern was intimidated by the Commander in Chief?

Newsflash: Bill Clinton is no longer the President.

Get over it.

Newsflash - the election is over and and your gal "Cankles" Clinton lost. Get over it.

Itís not really surprising that a guy who doesnít understand the concept of female consent would toss out a pathetic and sexist insult of Clinton. Because, you know, Trump is super attractive. Iím sure his ankles are hawt, yíall.

Fucking Christ.

So we can't make fun of the physical characteristics of politicians? Then no more "orange" references about Trump.

All this hand-wringing over what Trump said but nothing over what Bill Clinton did. Don't you think the White House intern was intimidated by the Commander in Chief?

Newsflash: Bill Clinton is no longer the President.

Get over it.

Newsflash - the election is over and and your gal "Cankles" Clinton lost. Get over it.

Itís not really surprising that a guy who doesnít really understand the concept of female consent would toss out a pathetic and sexist insult of Clinton. Because, you know, Trump is super attractive. Iím sure his ankles are hawt, yíall.

Fucking Christ.

Melania is pretty hot. The Donald isn't my thing.

The other thing I notice is that a lot of super sexist dudes are extremely unattractive themselves.

Exactly! This is why we're discussing the current President, Trump. You're the one that brought up Obama and Clinton.

I realize that this is a common tactic of Foxnews -- their headliners were all about Clinton just a few days ago, which is why you're probably hot and bothered about it -- but whataboutism doesn't fly around here.

If you want to sensibly defend Trump's actions and words, feel free. Or keep on tilting against windmills.

All this hand-wringing over what Trump said but nothing over what Bill Clinton did. Don't you think the White House intern was intimidated by the Commander in Chief?

Newsflash: Bill Clinton is no longer the President.

Get over it.

Newsflash - the election is over and and your gal "Cankles" Clinton lost. Get over it.

Itís not really surprising that a guy who doesnít understand the concept of female consent would toss out a pathetic and sexist insult of Clinton. Because, you know, Trump is super attractive. Iím sure his ankles are hawt, yíall.

Fucking Christ.

So we can't make fun of the physical characteristics of politicians? Then no more "orange" references about Trump.

Personally, I never bother to comment on Trumpís physical appearance.

His narcissism, weakness, stupidity, immorality, and treasonous behavior are more than enough for me.

I am aware rationality in modern lingo has to do with personal core beliefs. I can't speak for Popper, but to me, rationality means the ability and the will to distinguish facts from fiction or narratives, so no, it is not subjective and can be measured objectively. I would go even further and associate it with how one scores on a CRT (cognitive reflection test), which measure a person's tendency to override an incorrect "gut" response and engage in further reflection to find a correct answer.

As an elitist and a douche, I don't view someone a "true" person until one can successfully pass a CRT. After all, what really separates us from animals? Maybe nothing. Oh wait, most animals don't lie...

Last year, we came up with a ďTrump opposition meter,Ē identifying six powerful blocs who could limit or check Trump:

The federal bureaucracy. The courts. Democrats in Congress. Republicans in Congress. The public. The press.

Trump backs down, at least initially, if more than 1/2 of the power blocs are against him. The current crisis is at least a Level 5, with some of the public still supporting him. The immigration fuckup was a Level 6 with all but the most base (=those who think forcibly separating young children from their parents is a good idea) among us against Trump and Miller.

As these crises happen more and more, I speculate that bloc 4, Republicans in Congress, will begin to be more critical of Trump. Without that bloc, and with the bureacracy (particularly the Pentagon) against him, Trump will take his marbles and go home. Pence will finish his term.

I am very curious if Trump will actually send a former US ambassador to Russia for questioning.

The Senate voted (in another almost worthless Resolution) 98-0 to not send any Americans to Russia for (enhanced) interrogation. Trump backed down (again) right before the vote.

It'd make for an interesting SC case if Trump pushed it. Would the partisan "constitutionalist" SC agree with Trump? Would the dozen or so people go into hiding, hidden by patriots (liberals and conservatives working together?!?) as the Breitbart/pizzagate crowd searches for them using the power of the state? I guess California or the UK are the best places to hide.

Stop arguing with the fox cult members. Itís a pointless waste of energy.

That's a generous interpretation. Just as likely is that he's a paid Russian troll, rather than a homegrown American troll. Remember, what the Russians want most is America divided from itself, and from it's allies.

Which is why Fox News plays so nicely into their hands. Getting the extreme wings of the parties riled up is the whole point. Discord! Conflict! A House divided!

Maybe he's a genuine homegrown American troll, who just happens to coincidentally be doing the Russians bidding?

Stop arguing with the fox cult members. Itís a pointless waste of energy.

That's a generous interpretation. Just as likely is that he's a paid Russian troll, rather than a homegrown American troll. Remember, what the Russians want most is America divided from itself, and from it's allies.

Which is why Fox News plays so nicely into their hands. Getting the extreme wings of the parties riled up is the whole point. Discord! Conflict! A House divided!

Maybe he's a genuine homegrown American troll, who just happens to coincidentally be doing the Russians bidding?

That's a problem I have too. I dropped by the Fox news comments sections to day, and I honestly have no way of telling if the comments are by Russian agents or mentally disturbed Americans.

On a similar note, I am for free exchange of ideas and all, but can we prevent new members from posting in the "Off Topic" or general political posts until they have at least 100 relevant posts on mustachian topics?

Stop arguing with the fox cult members. Itís a pointless waste of energy.

That's a generous interpretation. Just as likely is that he's a paid Russian troll, rather than a homegrown American troll. Remember, what the Russians want most is America divided from itself, and from it's allies.

Which is why Fox News plays so nicely into their hands. Getting the extreme wings of the parties riled up is the whole point. Discord! Conflict! A House divided!

Maybe he's a genuine homegrown American troll, who just happens to coincidentally be doing the Russians bidding?

That's a problem I have too. I dropped by the Fox news comments sections to day, and I honestly have no way of telling if the comments are by Russian agents or mentally disturbed Americans.

On a similar note, I am for free exchange of ideas and all, but can we prevent new members from posting in the "Off Topic" or general political posts until they have at least 100 relevant posts on mustachian topics?

Ha. Iíd be up for this. I admit that I almost exclusively post in off-topic these days, but I did orignally post much more in the mustachian topics. Itís just that these days, I am pretty squared away in that department.

Stop arguing with the fox cult members. Itís a pointless waste of energy.

That's a generous interpretation. Just as likely is that he's a paid Russian troll, rather than a homegrown American troll. Remember, what the Russians want most is America divided from itself, and from it's allies.

Which is why Fox News plays so nicely into their hands. Getting the extreme wings of the parties riled up is the whole point. Discord! Conflict! A House divided!

Maybe he's a genuine homegrown American troll, who just happens to coincidentally be doing the Russians bidding?

That's a problem I have too. I dropped by the Fox news comments sections to day, and I honestly have no way of telling if the comments are by Russian agents or mentally disturbed Americans.

On a similar note, I am for free exchange of ideas and all, but can we prevent new members from posting in the "Off Topic" or general political posts until they have at least 100 relevant posts on mustachian topics?